Do you see something wrong in this statement? "I am a believer, but I am also a seeker. As a priest, I encourage people in their faith. But as a teacher of religion, I press people to think critically, to question, and to revise their faith as befits the call to greater spiritual maturity."

The statement is to be found in the East Valley Tribune’s "Spiritual Life" section of February 3, 2001. It was made by John Cunningham, the pastor of the St. Bridget Catholic Church in Mesa.

Mr. Cunningham’s statement is interesting to me because it represents a modernistic approach to the story of Jesus, and because Mr. Cunningham is set forth as a leading "clergyman" from our community.

Without mentioning the now infamous Jesus Seminar, Mr. Cunningham repeats in the language of that group many of their expressions of disbelief. His second paragraph begins, "We know more about Jesus today than Christians did in centuries past.. That is because of recent research on the part of scripture scholars whose aim is to uncover this luminous historical figure."

The scripture scholars he mentions are mostly men who began their study of Jesus from this starting point: "None of it is true." There was at the beginning a denial of any of the miracles, of the circumstances of Jesus’ life, and of the teachings of Jesus and their application to everyday life in a new order. Since the beginning, the only place that they have given to Jesus is that which cannot be denied by even the fiercest enemy. They will concede that there was a Galilean Jew by the name of Jesus who was a victim of Roman style execution – crucifixion. They will admit to the historical setting of times, places, and characters described in the New Testament, for these, including the existence of Jesus, are all a matter of historical record. But that is all.

The enemies of Christ have always tried to defeat him by denying all that we believe about him. That has been a failure. People still believe. So the devil’s servants have turned to the much more subtle strategy of undermining our trust. If Jesus was not the man depicted in the Scriptures, if we cannot believe the gospels, then why on earth would we devote our lives to him – how can we place our trust in such a fiction.

A cornerstone of disbelief is that the gospels were all "written decades later by individuals who never met him." In Mr. Cunningham’s eyes, that means we have to guess what parts of the gospels are true and what parts are not. The problem with Mr. Cunningham’s thinking is that cornerstone is made of chalk. It will not stand an investigation of either the internal or secular evidences of the question. There is plenty of evidence that the New Testament writers were the companions of Jesus during his life on earth. Much of that evidence is ignored and hidden by the so called "scripture scholars" that Mr. Cunningham refers to.

Where has Mr. Cunningham’s seeking led him? "When I began my study of the historical Jesus, I was taken aback to learn that, in all probability, he was illiterate (couldn’t know the law or answer or read in the temple), that virgin birth stories were a dime a dozen in the ancient world (apparently doesn’t place much credence in the Bible’s virgin birth story), that there were numerous messiahs, magicians and miracle workers in the first century Near East (amounts to a denial of Jesus as Messiah and his miracles), that his life ended not as grand Hollywood dramas depict, but without fanfare, perhaps without a trial …" Mr. Cunningham, what is it that you do believe? If you do not believe what the New Testament says about Jesus, doesn’t that make your profession as a Catholic priest a fraud? The question becomes, not who can believe in Jesus, but "Who can believe what you have to say about religion in any aspect?"

Mr. Cunningham contends that the ministry of Jesus was a "political protest… In the realm of religion, he was no less daring and controversial, demolishing the notions of reward and punishment, reconceptualizing the divine, so that God’s chief attribute was no longer holiness but compassion (I agree that we sometimes minimize the compassion and love of God. But is it not just as grievous to minimize his holiness?) … I was taught that Jesus established the church. Now I know that the historical Jesus (the one the really was, not the one we know) preached a reform of Judaism."

I know that we are all ready to turn to Mark 9 and Matthew 25, among other passages, to show that Jesus did not reconceptualize anything about God and holiness. But don’t you see, Mr. Cunningham believes that those passages where Jesus talks of hell and punishment are mere poems, allegories and appeasements to the superstitions of second and third century Christians. In other words, if what the gospels say about Jesus doesn’t fit Mr. Cunningham’s perception of how things are, he simply discounts those passages, or relegates them to fiction. His is a chalky foundation of malignant skepticism – malignant because it rests on the presupposition that the supernatural is really just super-fiction.

The Sadducees confronted Jesus with the question of the resurrection. Their intent was to give him a problem that had no solution so that they might ridicule belief in the afterlife. "But Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matt. 22:29). They claimed leadership in matters of the law of Moses. They were esteemed as experts in the religion and law of the Jews. But Jesus told them that they knew neither God nor the law. There are many in the religious world who claim to be experts on religion, like Mr. Cunningham – he is a Catholic priest, and he was "taken aback to learn" things that he had never imagined – things that he knows and you don’t.

Paul said to the elders of the Ephesian church: "I know that after my departing grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them" (Acts 20:29-30). Mr. Cunning ham is a grievous wolf, and his presence should not surprise us.

But Paul also speaks of those who would rise up from among us, speaking perverse things. Are we surprised when we find preachers of the gospel, members of the true church of the Lord, teaching that the Bible is not accurate with reference to what they cannot accept?

A serious charge is made against those in the church whom we would call "Pharisees." These are people who "bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger" (Matt. 23:4). Jesus called the Pharisees hypocrites.

But they were not the only hypocrites that Jesus named. There were the Sadducees, who placed themselves at the pinnacle of religious power, and didn’t believe it. Are those in the church who claim to be teachers of the truth, yet deny its truthfulness, to be compared with the Sadducees? How far is one who denies the Genesis account of creation, the universal flood of Genesis 6 or the tower of Babel from Mr. Cunningham’s infidelity?